wiki and math

[Pierre-Marie Baty]

Is it just me or???

The goal of our wiki is to

• provide bot programmers, and especially newbies and wannabe coders, the most comprehensive information center out there,
• provide bot users with a space to contribute in their favourite bots' documentation, tips and tricks, hints etc.

That's why we have two section:

• Programmer's section
• Bot user documentation

Since the programmers section is targeted at the broadest audience possible, I personally try to explain things slowly, with simple code and a lot of explanation surrounding it. When the subject is too complex, I don't dig into the explanation more than necessary and I try to provide sample template code that works instead of lenghty high-level technical explanations.

But honestly, pages such as this one
http://wiki.bots-united.com/index.php/Vector_Math
are enough to make any wannabe bot coder fly away in screams! Please, please, please folks, it's not because this new wiki allows math formulas to be written easily that you must abuse it!! Remember that many of us here, and I would bet most of the wannabe coders out there are teenagers with no idea what the hell these scary formulas mean!

How do you want a teenage coder not to shit in his pants at the sight of words such as "Einstein Convention", this or this or even matrices such as ??

Is this a wiki for bot coders or for mathematicians ?

So please keep things SIMPLE, and provide coders with what they expect to find: commented code that works, instead of mathematical *****!

Or is it just me ???


*edit* ok, I removed the last word...sorry... I do not want to offense anyone... but I really wanted to raise this question

*edit 2* ok, my point: more code and less math. That's all. Thank you for your attention

[Rick]

Agreed, bot coding goes fine here but I absolutely have no idea what all those formulas do which PMB posted....

[@$3.1415rin]

I didnt knew if I should add this matrix stuff, but since there are some function in HL2 ( I guess there wasnt any in HL1 ) using matrices, I thought it might be handy to have a little simple paragraph about them.

About different methods of determining the length of the vector : well, that's the general way to write that down. You are _not_ always using euclidian distances, e.g. most of us are using some sort of manhattan distance in their A* implementations. so it's not that far off, maybe shouldnt have written the general formula of that.

and ok, einstein convention might be a bit misplaced here, especially when nobody reads a book about related stuff. it's anyway widely used.

about more code : from my point of view I better like a simple formula than some piece of code, which might already include optimizations, component wise calculating, etc. which don't make the point of topic more obvious. especially code with unneccessary stuff like "pBot->" crap. that has nothing to do with the algorithm, so why put it there ?
just saw your comment : ok, that might be a reason, another reason is that your code would be easier just to copy and paste without understanding for all those using podbot or close to hpb bot code. if you understand it, there is no question of what you want to save and what not, otherwise, you are fucked anyway.

PS: and if you like greek characters or not ... well, that's just personal taste, isnt it ? i'm often writing scalar coefficients as greek characters, as well as transformations.

[Pierre-Marie Baty]

okay, I see you're pissed off already. That was not the intent. But that talk was needed anyway.

just saw your comment : ok, that might be a reason, another reason is that your code would be easier just to copy and paste without understanding for all those using podbot or close to hpb bot code.

*cough* well no, if you look closely you'll notice that none of the variables I put the pBot-> prefix in front exist, neither in the HPB_bot nor in PODbot. Unless coincidence. But I've chosen them carefully just for that purpose...
The idea is still to establish the difference between locally declared variables, and the persistent ones. But if you have a better idea, just say it!

[stefanhendriks]

i did not understand as ingle line of the given examples on math.

Unless we have some very good described document where one can explain every variable and method used so the formula could be understanded by every noobish math guy, i'd say, ok. But i don't see that coming. So lets keep it simple

[@$3.1415rin]

pissed off ?! pmb, be glad you dont know me that good dunno about that declaration what is local and what persistent. and I also dont know the variables of HPB bot, but that pBot-> just looked so hpbbot-stylish. my basic idea was just to write that general stuff as general as possible, not emphasising this HL bot relation, since we don't only want to be a forum for HL1/HL2 bot ppl. anyway, that's ok with me.


we are just starting the wiki guys ... e.g. the geometry article, it's just the outline ... although I dunno if we need explicit code in some parts. take e.g. the part "line hitting plane" : doesnt everybody know that (a+b)c = ac + bc from school ? and that you can do the same to both sides of an equation and it's still valid ( in most cases, dont divide by 0 and such stuff ) ? I mean, this way, you cannot copy and paste, ok, but you know where some formula comes from and it's not difficult to rearrange, so this knowledge might be useful when debugging or optimizing.

[botmeister]

I think both of you have a point, but a middle ground is what I think would be a good spot to aim for (pun intended).

I'd say it makes sense to put in the basics of relevant linear algebra, etc with references pointing the reader to the more advanced stuff. It also makes sense to give basic examples of what the formulas are used for so that people will have a chance at understanding what is written.

The other thing to consider, is for us to define exactly what the intention fo the wiki is. Should we leave out the advanced stuff when there may be some who appreciate having it in there? What about posting advance algo's such as mesh navigation with learning?

If there's to be a compromise, we'll end up with a wiki that is good only for no one.

I'm also not sure that this is the place to discuss wiki entries. Entries should be debated through the wiki itself. Is that not how a wiki is supposed to work?

My 2 cents.

[koraX]

less talking and more contributing :p

[sfx1999]

That article makes my head spin now, and I helped write it! Well, mainly the parts with the crazy forumlas. PMB, I don't think you are impartial to this decision. You've told me you don't like math that much.

Anyway, we should add more explanations on there.

[botmeister]

less talking and more contributing

Agreed. The wiki is the best place to resolve issues with wiki entires. If the formula is incomprehensible, then get in there and make it readable (if you can that is).